Hi, >From a JPA specification standpoint, the right way to handle this is to make the AbstractObject class be a @MappedSuperclass, instead of an @Entity. That basically means that it's a persistent type, but not one that manages its own identity. The limitation is that (per the spec) you can't have relationships to @MappedSuperclass types, and you can't query for them.
There are other OpenJPA-specific options that you could use, too, but if it's appropriate for you, the @MappedSuperclass approach is probably the best, from a portability standpoint. -Patrick On 9/4/07, Christian Eugster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hello, > > I try to build a database on some hierarchical java-classes: > > I have a superclass, say AbstractObject, with an identity field named id. > Subclasses inherit that field, but in the database tables I use for every > subclass another name for the id-column. I cannot see how I can do that, > because the annotation for the id field is done on the superclass. Is there a > way to map the one and only id field in the superclass to the id columns in > the database tables with different names? > > I read the manual, but have not seen a solution for it. Do you know any? > > Thanks! > > Christian > -- > **************************** > Christian Eugster > Grissian Widum 14 > I-39010 Tisens > -------------------------------------- > Handy Schweiz: 0041 79 594 85 45 > Handy Italia: 0039 333 888 77 64 > Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Psssst! Schon vom neuen GMX MultiMessenger gehört? > Der kanns mit allen: http://www.gmx.net/de/go/multimessenger > -- Patrick Linskey 202 669 5907
